ArticleReviews in urology2016
Health Economic Impact and Prospective Clinical Utility of Oncotype DX® Genomic Prostate Score.
Article in Reviews in urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Genomic-Based Risk Stratification in Localised Prostate Cancer Treatment Optimisation: Clinical Impact and Health Economic Evidence.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Assessment of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2019Pooled it
- The Role of Genomic Scores in the Management of Prostate Cancer Patients: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Utility of the prostest to predict and monitor response to chemotherapy in metastatic Castration-Resistant prostate cancer: A prospective pilot study.BMC cancer · 2025Observational
- Genomic prostate score and treatment selection in favourable intermediate-risk prostate cancer.BJUI compass · 2025Article
- Genomics in active surveillance and post-prostatectomy patients: A review of when and how to use effectively.Current urology reports · 2024Review
- Optimal Use of Tumor-Based Molecular Assays for Localized Prostate Cancer.Current oncology reports · 2022Review
- A review on the role of tissue-based molecular biomarkers for active surveillance.World journal of urology · 2022Review
- Tissue- and Liquid-Based Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Precision Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Health Economic Evidence for Liquid- and Tissue-based Molecular Tests that Inform Decisions on Prostate Biopsies and Treatment of Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.European urology open science · 2021Review
- Article
- Identification a novel set of 6 differential expressed genes in prostate cancer that can potentially predict biochemical recurrence after curative surgery.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2019Article
- Entering an era of radiogenomics in prostate cancer risk stratification.Translational andrology and urology · 2018Review
- Construction of a set of novel and robust gene expression signatures predicting prostate cancer recurrence.Molecular oncology · 2018Article
- Balancing Confounding and Generalizability Using Observational, Real-world Data: 17-gene Genomic Prostate Score Assay Effect on Active Surveillance.Reviews in urology · 2018Article
- Clinical Utility of Gene Expression Classifiers in Men With Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer.JCO precision oncology · 2018Article
- Active Surveillance Use Among a Low-risk Prostate Cancer Population in a Large US Payer System: 17-Gene Genomic Prostate Score Versus Other Risk Stratification Methods.Reviews in urology · 2017Review
- Tissue-based biomarkers in prostate cancer.Expert review of precision medicine and drug development · 2017Article
- Biomarkers for prostate cancer detection and risk stratification.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
- Prostate cancer biomarkers and multiparametric MRI: is there a role for both in prostate cancer management?Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer (CaP) will be diagnosed in approximately 181,000 American men in 2016. Despite the high number of deaths from CaP in the United States, the disease has a protracted natural history and many men diagnosed with CaP will not die of the disease regardless of treatment. Unfortunately, identification of men with truly indolent/ nonaggressive CaP is challenging; limitations of conventional diagnostic modalities diminish the ability of physicians to accurately stage every case of CaP based on biopsy results alone. The resulting uncertainty in prognosis may prompt men with low-risk CaP to proceed to morbid and expensive treatments for an unclear survival benefit. Incorporation of the Genomic Prostate Score (GPS) as part of the decision algorithm for patients with National Comprehensive Cancer Network very low-risk and low-risk cancer led to a substantial increase in uptake of active surveillance and substantial cost savings. GPS provides physicians and patients with an additional tool in assessing personalized risk and helps guide individual decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.